Pikipedia:Claims

Shortcut: P:CLAIM

In a nutshell: When you see a claim that isn't an obvious fact or backed by a source, challenge it, keep in mind some gotchas, and improve the article.

Like how you are made up of your individual cells, an article is made up of individual edits. Besides random improvements, most edits on the wiki add facts. But for some, since it is not clear that they are real facts, they are really just claims.

Sometimes, whether maliciously or not, the information in the claim is not correct. (Examples as to why include a typo, a good-faith user that is misguided, some bias, incomplete information, ambiguous information, a popular misconception, a user that's just experimenting on the wiki without awareness, or even vandals or spam.) For instance:

• ✘ "Winged Pikmin cause double damage against airborne enemies."

  A common misconception; Winged Pikmin don't change their damage based on the enemies, unlike what the data files might hint at.

As users of Pikipedia, it's important to challenge claims, in order to make sure that misinformation and disinformation can be spotted and dealt with quickly. Bad information that isn't dealt with tends to stay with the wiki for years, fooling many readers along the way.

This information mostly pertains to Pikipedia staff, but any regular user can chime in as well whenever they spot an edit or a part of an article that doesn't seem fully credible.

See also: Pikipedia:Verifiability.

Identifying claims

Some edits aren't claims at all: a technical change in the wikitext, a minor improvement, some image adjustments, etc.

In addition, if an edit is making a claim, but it is either undeniable, or has a good source with it, then it's not so much a claim as it is a fact. You can still double-check it or improve it if you want, but there's no need to challenge its veracity. Examples:

• ✔ "Blue Pikmin are the last Pikmin type found in Pikmin 3."
• ✔ "In Pikmin 2, Pikmin work on bridges faster if they latch onto them."

Some edits are obviously making claims, like a user adding a sentence about how a given mechanic works. But others can be more implied because the person making the edit didn't provide enough context. In their mind, they know why they are making the claim, but if other editors can't know that, some sleuthing is necessary. Example:

• "The President, after using the wrong loan house, goes into hiding." → "The President manages money poorly and can't get out of his debt spirals."

  What was the reasoning behind this change? Is it implying something different? Should it?

Also, some edits just seem harmless on the surface, but once you dig a bit deeper, you start finding some problems. Even the removal of information is a form of claim: if a user removes a sentence, it could be because they are claiming it is false.

Challenging the claim

By challenging a claim, you're trying to find out if there is something wrong with the user's edit. And even if there isn't, the fact that you felt the need to challenge it means the information isn't clear, so it can still be improved.

Research

The most obvious way is to research what the edit is claiming. Most of the time, this involves checking in-game to see if it's true.

Consider different versions

If someone makes a claim, consider the fact that it could only apply to some versions of the game. Pikmin games come in many versions, be it in terms of software updates or regional differences, and some surprising version differences can be found. So what may sound like a general truth may actually only be true in some cases.

Consider different interpretations

Sometimes the text in an edit can be factually correct, but other people could interpret it differently. Maybe there's information missing so people have to make assumptions that may end up being incorrect. Maybe the way it's worded can lead some people to understand something different from the text. Try to put yourself in the shoes of a reader with no context or knowledge on the subject, and imagine how they would read it.

An example of an ambiguous text:

• ✘ "In Pikmin 2, flower Pikmin start twirling at the peak of their throw, and then fall slowly. In New Play Control! Pikmin 2, they instead stop spinning."

A much clearer approach would be:

• ✔ "In Pikmin 2, flower Pikmin start twirling at the peak of their throw, and then fall slowly. In New Play Control! Pikmin 2, they still stop somersaulting at the peak, but then instead fall down normally, and at a normal speed."

Consider their motivation

By reading between the lines, it can become easier to decide whether a claim is bogus or legitimate from the user's intention. Try the following:

• Read the edit summary.
• Check other edits made around the same time, or by the same user.
• Check if the user takes care in their edit, bothered to add a summary, is registered, etc. If so, it's less likely they made the edit to cause harm.

Consider the way the games read their data

If the point in question is about some internal data in the game's files, consider if the game really reads that data. There are some unused files inside of the games, and even data that is read can be altered before actually being used. An example would be the fairly cryptic way cave object numbers are stored in Pikmin 2's files.

Talk to others

You can always collaborate with other Pikmin fans whenever an edit needs to be challenged. For instance, when you have no good way of testing in-game, due to it being something that's very hard to do. Or when you don't have enough knowledge of or access to different versions. Plus it's always possible somebody else is already looking into that edit, or can chime in some extra context you weren't aware about.

Updating accordingly

Once you've identified any potential problems with the edit, you should update the article to improve it.

Naturally, if the claim ends up being objectively incorrect, no matter the version or interpretation, it should be removed or corrected.

If you were able to do research something, you should add some source next to the relevant text, be it the existing claim by the user, or a correction you yourself have made. Ideally this would be an in-game screenshot or video, or some data from the game files.

If you can't add a source, you could try editing the article to include as much information as possible, and ways for readers to verify the information themselves more easily. Basically, anything you can to ensure readers that yes, that claim is completely factual.

If you can't confirm the claim yourself, and talking to others didn't yield any results, you can drop some templates notifying readers that this information is being challenged. Add {{source needed}}, {{game help}}, or {{todo}}, using as much info as you can. Going to a talk page may even be necessary for trickier claims.

If the claim in and of itself is factual, but you think it could be interpreted wrong, try rewording it to be more clear, or to add missing context or information.

If you couldn't find any problem, maybe the edit wasn't a claim that needed challenging in the first place. When you can find such cases, please inform a staff member, so that this very documentation can be improved.

Regardless of what you do, make sure to explain your reasoning in the edit summary. If you are a staff member, patrolling the edit after you are done is also a good idea.